Expecting Rain

Sigh. I'm not sure how much more money I can spend on Bob. Thanks for the write-up, MMD. (I guess).

You know, You might just get in touch with Benny Boy. He is gifting great gifts.

Thanks again to Bennyboy!! A true hero for those of us who've found beauty and meaning in Dylan's music and go to websites like this.

I don't have anything new to add about the vinyl rip -- y'all have already made a lot of great observations I agree with. I was really surprised by the sound, though, I definitely didn't expect anything this marked! Pretty substantial change, intuitively felt more like a remix than a remaster. The space really is a revelation, it's kinda surreal to hear after so many years of having the CD mix. The music sounds much more "like it was recorded yesterday". The voice sounds more real -- it provides me a glimmer of continuity with the '75 tour which has always been a completely different tour for me sonically (and for which the official release [Bootleg Series Vol. 5] nailed as far as vocal sound quality). Agree that it feels like a layer of crap has been removed. I also like the vinyl noise -- whenever I'm listening to something with crackles (be it the BOTT test pressing or a Yazoo release), I know I'm doing it because whatever I'm listening to is damn good. By all rational** measures, Bennyboy's remastered vinyl rip is a huge upgrade.

**But there's the rub. Our brains are only partly rational, and if there's one thing I've learned in my years as a wannabe audiophile, it's that there are no absolutes. Mono vs stereo, vinyl vs digital, original master tape vs remaster/remix, authentic in-the-studio sound vs tinkered-with master mix, natural vs loud/compressed, warm vs harsh -- there are exceptions to every preference for me, depending on the particular album. Highway 61 is an example -- my favorite album out of over a thousand, but over the years my preferences have shifted back and forth from the DCC to the 2003 redbook to the mono. Would you wanna hear that harsh harmonica live in the studio while Bob was recording JWH, or would you prefer listening to the mono mix? I prefer the latter. For BIABH, the 2003 stereo remix presents the vocals and instruments with more detail and accuracy than anywhere else, but I prefer the mono mix that Dylan and Tom Wilson crafted because Subterranean Homesick Blues should sound that powerful. A few years back, Nirvana's Live At Reading was officially released -- the audio CD was crap. It's compressed and there's no space between the vocals and the instruments. Sounds like a bad bootleg cassette. The audio on the DVD version of the show sounds a lot clearer. But as time proceeded, my brain/ear started telling me it didn't like the DVD's audio. It felt too clean, too precise, too (gasp) sterile. Not enough noise. My brain was craving that loud compressed audio CD mix, it worked better for this particular show (usually my brain does the opposite with "loud" masters). I haven't listened to the DVD's mix in ages now.

Which longwindedly leads me back to Hard Rain. I became a Dylan fan in 2001. Fell in love with Hard Rain within that first nine months. Two years later, most of the major albums in his catalog started getting remastered (and the sound quality obsessing first began). Over the years, Hard Rain remained one of the only good Dylan albums that hadn't been upgraded from its original 1980s CD release. Therefore, I developed more of an emotional attachment to that mix than I could to any of the other "pre-remastered" albums. I became married to its sound. [Really curious how those of you who've been fans since the 1960s have felt with all the re-releases over the years, including with the CD age. We know how Neil Young feels.] Right now I'm still deciding whether to give the CD mix up, and I've been delaying doing a lot of A-B'ing. As technically inferior as it is, I'm wondering if the muddy CD release (with its layer of crap, poor instrument separation, rougher vocal, more "noise") is my Nirvana Reading audio CD or BIABH mono mix -- it might be rough and noisy and dirty enough to make the vinyl remaster sound a bit clean and (gasp) sterile in comparison, even with the vinyl rip being spotted some vinyl noise.

I'm probably just in a bit of denial here, and will likely snap out of this soon as I finish grieving the loss of that CD mix I've been listening to for over ten years. I know it's irrational. I was thinking about this earlier today, and the first few lines of "I Threw It All Away" on the vinyl remaster (played loud over the stereo) almost slapped me in the face. I also had some Pavlovian salivation when I read that Bennyboy's doing a new rip, so maybe that's a sign too. I'm still extremely grateful for this vinyl remaster, Bennyboy, and have been enjoying the torrid affair with it so far. But I just need to give myself a little more time, 'cause the original is the version I had first married.

.. it's Yummy.
= Practially all
- i have eaten
four days now. ..

You should have some peanuts or eggs, as good as Bob is, he doesn't have a big nutritional value, I'm concerned about your health.

A really great post.

I hear you, I really do - Hard Rain was the first Dylan album I ever bought, on cassette at age 15. Can you imagine how that arsetastic mix sounded on a crap Walkman played through the shittest earphones known to man?

Like manna from riff heaven, of course.

Music is one of the most mysterious things - it neurologically links us like a time machine to experience, to lived life and the memory of it. All you have to do is hear the first few notes of a cherished song and the neurons instantly fire and transport you back to that time and place when you first heard it, when you relistened to it, when you fell in love to it, when you danced to it, when you argued to it, when you cried to it, when you.....

So yeah, I get where you're coming from, totally. The magic of that ropey Hard Rain production transcends its limitations, absolutely. Thats the power of RTR Dylan - not even murk and mud can keep him down!

But the beautiful thing is you can keep that mix we've had for countless years now, and add this new one alongside it. You can make new memories, put new markers in the emotional territory to revisit. You can see the same landscape from a different vantage point, illuminated and resplendant.

Dylan threw it all away. You don't have to.

This, for me, is the post of the month. You understand perfectly that it is NOT about sound quality, it's about the listener's personal relationship to the music. Hence those who first listened to Dylan's music in mono feel that is the 'authentic' sound of the 60s records, while the rest of us who grew up with the stereo mixes can't really see what the fuss is about. Similar thing happened a while back when the Clash's first album was remixed for CD; the primitive production that had been one of its strenghs was lost in the 'upgrade'. To me, at least. Others probably felt the remix was a huge improvement.
I think the best way of thinking about all these remixes and remasters is that they are all alternative versions and none is the 'definitive' one. Something like how there is no definitive edition of the Bible!

One day, I'll teach a course on a selection of the posts in this forum. It'll be about truth and art. These two posts, and Benny's in between them, will be part of the required reading.
Sometimes, though I fully know better, I despair at the fact that, for instance, a night of music played in my house with or by friends -- the chance grooves or riffs, the impossibly beautiful (because who knew we were capable of anything like that, and never to be repeated) harmonies, some rhythm that, for reasons you'll all understand, can't be remembered in the morning -- even when captured by recording, just isn't there, not really. But then I remember that everything dies.

We make a science of these recordings, but music isn't a natural object of science, is it? It isn't like that. It is, as Benny said, mysterious. In part because it is so essentially transient. And its so much, again Benny, a part of a world in a moment. It's in memory. And memory is tricky and a world of its own.

Thanks so much for the kind feedback, guys. Glad I didn't kill the thread . I likewise found y'all's posts great to read and quite thought-provoking. Y'all have well described the magic of music on the human soul. And as for versions, I think the Bible analogy's a good one.

I almost feel sorry for the Justin Bieber and Rihanna fans who don't get to share their appreciation for their artist with such a thoughtful fanbase.

I'm sure there's a remaster rip of Bieber's magnum opus doing the rounds. The one where they've replaced all the noise with pure silence.

Yes, perhaps some No-Noise technology would be useful for certain artists, as long as it was maximized all the way.

Oh yeah, read above that Hard Rain was your first Dylan album. Given its reception by critics, how did that happen?

I was 15 - it was 1986, so a decade on from release. I had some pocket money going spare, and liked the cover of the cassette.

I really wanted to buy a porno mag instead, but this seemed just slightly less dodgy. Just slightly, mind....

Good call. That's the magic of Dylan -- enough to overpower a 15-year old boy's hormones!

Good call. That's the magic of Dylan -- enough to overpower a 15-year old boy's hormones![/quote]
Well, a certain kind of boy!
For me, it was one day at 15yrs old, $20 in hand, and 3 12" singles: the Smiths, Beastie Boys (She's On It) and the Damned. So, no porn for me either.

It was the nervous horse expression on Bob's face that first attracted me as a young woman to this album, looking at me large as life from the cover of a friend's copy at university! I have never possessed a vinyl copy myself, and I'll now have to consider my CD as something to fill up my 'Box of Vision' and keep the 'real' one out for my listening pleasure. It's terrific, not much more to say because others have said it already, like a dark painting which after restoration reveals figures lurking in the shadows and the main characters in refreshed and vibrant colours.

Enough pretentious rot from me. Get your 'rip' or buy the record (wish I had the splendid hifi and the funds) and listen for yourselves.

Thanks Bennyboy.

Nervous horse expression? Ah, you must have been looking at Hard Rein!

Thank you. I am available for childrens parties, weddings and funerals.

Whisper this VERY quietly, but I've got a vinyl drop of 'Slow Train Coming' which will make you weep with joy. PMs only!

Do you remember that 1966 concert where someone asked for hard rain and Bob said : Hard rain ? I wish i saw some hard rain . I feel that way right now

Try living in London right now. Fucking rain wherever you look.

Thanks Bennyboy.

But listen Hard Rain in this way is a shitty situation... I wish I was there.

Thanks Benny. Even to these time-worn ears, your remastered remaster is a significant improvement over my (also time-worn) copy of the first-issue vinyl (haven’t bothered with the CD). Can’t do much about the ears, but MOV will be getting another order.

Yes , the difference is clear. Fantastic listening experience , excellent rip thanks Benny.


Probably silly question : Is there a way i can burn FLAC files to a CD ?

Dunno man - I never use CDs anymore.

I think MediaMonkey does it for you though - I recommend MM anyway as a music manager....sure kicks iTunes in the balls and then some.

Or.. download a freebie called FLAC FrontEnd, select files, decode to .wav & burn! (Use Roxio not Windows Media Player to get nice gapless finished CD!)

Thanks. I never use CDs either but i figured i have to save all those beauties i downloaded recently someplace safer . It seems like i don't really have them if they're just files in my computer . I doubt if a cd can actually sound that great though .